Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Alright. Good evening, and welcome to the Sacramento County Planning Commission's meeting for Monday, 01/12/2026. Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Absolutely member conquering here member devlin here member virga here and let the record reflect that currently member borha and member krone sabanano are currently not present

thank you very much and before we stand for the pledge of allegiance just want to commemorate our nation's founding two fifty years this year so our first meeting of the year thought it would be a great time to kind of reflect before our oath on our nation's experience, challenges and and progress and upholding ideals such as liberty and self governance, and that allowed me enough time for our two other members to walk in. So with that, please join me in the pledge of allegiance.

Just let the record reflect that members Corona Sabanano and members Borja are present.

Thank you very much. Clerk will you please provide the announcements for tonight's hearing?

Yes the county fosters public engagement during the meeting and encourages public participation civility and the use of courteous language the commission does not condone the use of profanity vulgar language gestures or other inappropriate behavior including personal attacks or threat directed toward any meeting participant. Seating may be limited and available on a first come first served basis to make an in person public comment please complete and submit a speaker request form to the clerk each individual will be invited to the podium to make a comment members of the public may send a written comment which is distributed to commission members and filed in the record contact information is optional and should include the meeting date and agenda agenda item number to be sent as follows email a comment to boardclerk@sackcounty.gov mail a comment to 708 Street Suite 2450 in Sacramento California 95008 And 14 and that concludes the announcement.

Thank you very much. As I understand it the applicant for agenda item number one under non contested portion may not be might be running late or is here? With that I was perfect. Alright. Well, clerk will you please read out item number one please?

Item number one is Plmp2024Dash00179StacyAvenue parcels map. This is a tentative parcel map, a special development parcel, a permit, and a design review. The property is located at 6516 Stacy Avenue approximately a 135 feet from the intersection of Stacy Avenue and Citrus Avenue in the South Sacramento community and the environmental document is exempt.

Thank you very much. Is there a desire for staff to present? No. No. Alright. Moving on to the applicant if they're here and like to provide some comments. Good evening. My

name is Richard Rosamovic. Lies will be sworn in. Yes.

Yes, please.

And if you wish to address the commission about any items on the agenda, please stand to be sworn in. Please raise your right hand and the appropriate response is I do. Do you swear that the testimony that you are about to give to this board is the truth, so help you God? And if you do not swear, do you affirm?

I do.

Thank you.

Thank you. My name is Richard Rosamovich. I'm with Area West Engineers. We're representing the property owner. We have I guess I have

to say I have been

sworn. We' read the staff report and we concur with the conditions of approval and that' all I have. We respectfully ask that you approve the project as submitted.

Thank you very much. Any questions from the dais for the applicant? No? No? Alright, thank you very much. Thank you. Sir, any comments from the public on this agenda item? Seeing none, any on

No, I have not received any public comments for this item.

All right. I'll bring the item back to the dais for discussions and deliberations. Or entertaining a motion.

Move staff recommendation.

I have a motion by the vice chair. I'll second it. And a second from commissioner verga. Clerk will you please call there we go.

And with the members present that vote does pass with all members voting yes.

Thank you very much that moves us to agenda item number two clerk.

Item number two is plmp twenty twenty 2Dash00291HolyCrossNewChurchHall this is a use permit amendment and a design review the property is located at 9000 Jackson Road approximately ten eighty seven feet southeast of South Wad Avenue and Jackson Road in the Vineyard community and the environmental document is a mitigated negative declaration

Thank you very much. And is there a desire for county staff to provide any review or summary? No? No? Seeing none, is the applicant here?

Good evening. Let's get you sworn in.

Okay. Please raise your right hand, and the appropriate response is, I do. Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give to this board is the truth, so help you God? And if you do not swear, do you affirm? I do. Thank you.

Good

evening, Commission. I am the project applicant, the architect of the project. We also have our civil engineer, if there's any related civil questions. And then Father Tim is also here in the parish. So, we are here if you guys have any questions. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Any questions for the applicant? That's it. Thank you very much. Any members of the public wish to comment or?

We do have one public comment. Wonderful. From a Kelly Grady.

Kelly here? Are you gonna pass? Okay. Okay. That's fine. Any other members of the public wish to comment? Not seeing any. Any online?

None.

Okay.

Bringing it back to the dais. Is there any comments, deliberations, or entertainment for a motion?

I'm happy to move the item. Second.

Okay we have a second by Commissioner Devlin and a or in a I'm sorry a motion by Commissioner Devlin and a second by the Vice Chair.

And that item passes with all members present voting yes.

Thank you very much. That moves us to item number three. Clerk?

Item number three is PLMP2023Dash00062 I Yumin Buddhist Temple. This is a use permit and a design review. The property is located at 6225 Excelsior Road, approximately 700 feet north of the intersection of Elder Creek Road and Excelsior Road in the vineyard community, and the environmental document is a mitigated negative declaration.

Thank you very much. Is there a desire for to have staff present, or are we able to save staff? Alright. Moving on is the applicant here who wishes to provide any comment comments on the project. I don't see the applicant. No? Oh, here they come.

Good evening. And I will swear you in before you take your testimony.

I'm sorry, say that again?

I'm gonna swear you in before you take your testimony. And so, can you raise your right hand? And the appropriate response is, I do. Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give to this board is the truth, so help you God? And if you do not swear, do you affirm?

I swear.

Thank you. Excuse

me, my name is Lyle Campbell. I'm the site planner and landscape architect for this project representing the applicant.

So if you have any questions for me, I'd be happy to answer those.

Okay, thank you very much. Any questions for the applicant, or the representative of the applicant? No? Not seeing any. Alright, well thank you very much. That was easy, thank you. Easy. Any members of the public wish to comment on this agenda item? Not seeing any, any on the We have

not received any public comment for

this Alright, bringing it back to the commission. Any comments? Any entertainments from a motion?

I'd like to make a motion to move staff recommendation.

Alright. We've got it moved by the vice chair. And we have a second by commissioner Saviano.

That will passes with all members present voting yes.

Lightning speed agenda item four.

Item number four is plmp 2025 dash 35 this is 2021 through 2029 housing element amendment one a general plan amendment to amend the 2021 through 2029 housing element post adoption of the countywide rezone program and a zoning ordinance amendment to comply with the state use right of definition. This is countywide, and the environmental document is notice of exemption. Good evening.

Good evening. Alright. Good evening, commissioners. I'm Riley Scholes, associate planner and lead planner on this application. Do we have the slides live here?

Alrighty. To start out, I do wanna reiterate that this action does not create any new development rights and is only incorporating previous actions into the general plan and zoning code text. Text. Alrighty. So with the adoption of the housing element, the land inventory chapter demonstrate that the county had, met its requirements for residential capacity for the regional housing needs allocation for moderate and above moderate income categories however we had a shortfall of lower income category units to establish this the housing element provides programs that are our primary mechanism to address these shortfalls.

For example, we have program a one and program a two as the primary mechanisms to address housing element shortfalls and complete arena obligations. Alrighty. So the first program a one was conducted through the countywide rezone program. That was approved by the board on 08/20/2024. After the rezone program, we established a significant buffer in all of our arena categories.

We can see that buffer on this side there. County staff aimed for at least a 20% buffer so that if any of those sites were lost from our inventory for other development or other income categories, we had significant buffer and didn't have to scramble to find new sites to remain in compliant with state law. For program a two, we are addressing the use by right development on land inventory sites that meet at least 20% affordable units on for use by right without the need for discretionary entitlements. These zoning code amendments were approved through the California Senate Bill two package, is adopted by the board on 08/09/2022 with some additional changes made on 12/13/2022. The project resulted in the affordable housing incentive program or AHIP program, which is our consistency with senate bill two.

Alrighty. So this project has been under HCD timeline of review, and I've got it up on this slide here. So during our work on the rezone program, HCD inquired about its status and was remaining in contact with us throughout that process. After completion, we reached back out to HCD or the housing California Department of Housing and Community Development, just to get that acronym. HCD then provided a technical assistance letter noting that rezone site and analysis were not incorporated within the housing element.

Staff then provided documentation demonstrating that all analysis was done in compliance with state zoning state law. However, HCD indicated that we would need to remain substantially compliant, we would need to amend the housing element and the zoning code to incorporate, the rezone program and program a two to be specifically with the definition as proposed in state law. As a result, staff is requesting the following entitlements, a general plan amendment to amend the 2021, 2029 housing element post adoption of the countywide rezone program, approved through the Sacramento County Regional Housing Needs Allocation Rezone Project, and a zoning ordinance amendment to chapter one section one point seven point three point eight to integrate the state definition of use by right as defined in California government code. Alrighty, so to go over housing element amendment one, we have received HCD direction to prepare the following. The main work is through appendix e which is incorporating that site level analysis and assessment of fair housing subject to AB Assembly Bill six eighty six.

We're also updating appendix c, the land inventory to include all of the sites added through the rezone program and also making conforming edits to chapters one, three, eight, and eleven of the housing element. Appendix E was added to address the following and primarily intended to incorporate program a one in all of the changes that were previously approved by the board through that application. I'm gonna go into some detail on some of these, but we have the impartial specific suitability analysis here. So through our review of state law, we have found that all of the sites that were proposed through the rezone program meet site zoning and site size, state, and zoning code requirements. We also reviewed them for locational factors including proximity to target communities, public transportation, and recreational amenities, and many more factors required through state law.

Additionally, we also reviewed all the development categories for all 59 lower income category sites to ensure that they are able to be developed for the minimum densities that we have assigned them units for. Through Appendix E, we also concluded our review of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, or AFFH, for all 59 lower income sites. The countywide rezone program citing outcomes and supporting housing action plan programs demonstrate program A1 advances those goals, and by placing those substantial share of lower income in both target areas with high resources as well as strengthening opportunities in over concentrated areas, the proposed sites all support the housing element and state laws AFH goals. We're also amending the chapter one introduction with some updated text to cite the new documents and the new rezone sites. Chapters three and eight are also receiving similar updates with the land inventory receiving all of the new sites to reference those first, HCD compliance.

Chapter 11, we are updating our assessment of fair housing to site Appendix E as our primary source for all the new rezone sites. Appendix C is receiving those parcel level inventory to have each parcel listed within our categories. Appendix D, the vacant land inventory maps is including the new visual mapping to be accurate with the rezone program. For the zoning code amendment we are proposing, we are adding zoning code language to that section to comply with California government code to clarify what projects are used by right, which includes projects that meet at least 20% of units for lower income households and meet one of those categories listed below. It's also including the definition of use by right from California government code.

So once we are moving through this project, we are also working on the HCD certification project. We are conducting rounds of informal review with HCD, and we are still

Excuse me. If you're gonna have a conversation, could you please take that outside? Sir? Sir? There we go.

Right.

Got the interruption.

Oh, no problem. To take it from the top here, staff is currently in coordination with HCD and has conducted several rounds of informal review to ensure that the proposed amendments, as requested by HCD, are within compliance with state law and government code. Amendment one was made available for a seven day public review consistent with state law and no public comments were received. CEFSA has also submitted to HCD the current projects that exhibits that you are reviewing tonight to ensure compliance. We have not received the formal letter listed in that bullet point.

However, we are currently in coordination and HDD has not indicated any problems for us moving forward as is, and we are still ongoing coordination. After board review, staff will submit to HCD for final certification, and if the housing element is not brought into compliance in a timely manner, the county faces decertification of the housing element and loss of funding sources. So, on top of that, decertification of the housing element can result in us being referred to the attorney general and further actions and fines being placed upon the county. However, staff does not see that as the direction that HED will be pursuing and has been a positive relationship working with HCD. So as a result, planning staff is recommending the findings, finding that the HE amendment is compliant with government code, state law, and it meets our RENA obligations, and it was properly noticed per California government code.

And, staff is making the following recommendations for the planning commission, determine the notice of exemption is adequate and complete, adopt a resolution one recommending the board approve the amendments to the general plan, excuse me, to the general plan housing element subject to the findings listed within the resolution and planning and environmental review staff also recommend the planning commission make the following recommendations to the board recognizing the project is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA guidelines sections fifteen oh one six one b three, adopt a resolution authorizing amendments to the general plan housing element subject to findings listed within the resolution, and approve an ordinance amending chapters section one point seven point three a to integrate the state definition of use by right as defined in California government code. That concludes my presentation. With me tonight is principal planner for the long range division, Joel Inman, and we're ready to answer any questions you have.

Thank you very much. Any questions from the commissioners?

I'll take a start. Thank you so much. Really appreciate the presentation as well as the brief walk through that happened. I wanna say before the holiday break, so I appreciate that both. Looking at the almost 300 page strike through version of your document, there's a number of tables there where the numbers have changed. Can you kind of explain, is it because it's a, like, for example, pages thirteen and fourteen of, I want to say this is attachment to the red line version and the strikes throughs. What are the reasons as to why the numbers have changed if we're kind of just, you know, responding back to comments from ACD?

Yeah. So all of those changes in numbers reassessment were done through the countywide rezone program. There was some reassessment of our arena obligations in our current land inventory sites that required us to change how we were assessing some of our sites. So that also resulted in changes in the numbers. So that's why some of the previous sites that were on there are changing as well as adding additional sites.

Understood. And for someone who might not be as well versed with kind of like land use, what does that mean kind of overall health of our available sites and arena targets? Are good? Are we in, like, yellow, green, orange, or red? Or does this document not give us that answer?

Yeah, so through the Rezone program, we are currently within a buffer. County staff aimed for at least a 20% buffer in all of our categories, and currently we are in that area. So that basically means that if anything happens to our rezone sites such as, say, one of the so the best way to say it is things on the land inventory site are not required to develop as their category. That is up to the property owner's discretion in the end. If a lower income site were to be developed with a moderate income apartment, then it would be the county's responsibility to find additional sites to continue to meet our lower income requirements.

So having that buffer means that instead of having to immediately go find that site, we have time to select, analyze, and meet all of our state requirements.

Understand. Thank you. And then you also had mentioned that there's some next steps. You know, should this move I I think this is a a vote today. I'm not too sure. But I think it is a vote that we need to adopt. You can keep if you could, again, kinda walk us through the next steps. And do we anticipate any more feedback with HCD? Have they had a chance to kinda see our strike through, our red line version, and hopefully, we we will not be any issues with that moving forward?

Yeah, so we have So to go over next steps first, then we're gonna be going after we receive the recommendation here, we will be going to the Board of Supervisors to receive our final approval of the resolution and ordinances, and after that, then we will submit to HCD for final review. So to follow-up on HCD, we've been in close coordination with them, basically, this whole process ever since we were doing rezone program in order to add all those sites to the arena, And we haven't indicated any issues as we've gone through the process after all of our technical assistance or any current issues with the versions that you are reviewing tonight.

Alright. Thank you.

Just want to you for your presentation. That helped kind of understand and not ask you a whole bunch of the same questions I asked you during your presentation. And just my point being that last page of your presentation was part of the subject of my email to Todd and others about what this recommendation and the vote on our side is saying about those documents and that whole thing. So, perfectly glad with what you did, the ones that have been further in the dark than I was when I went through all these documents again after the presentation. So just wanted to say thank you.

Thank you.

Yeah. Just thank you very much for a very thorough report. It was, I think, very well done and, you know, for the subject matter, pretty easy to read. So appreciate that. Yeah. I'm happy to move the item if there's no more discussion.

Oh, yep. Commissioner?

Yes. Thank you so much for your presentation. I'm just curious if you can share a little bit more about kind of the county's responsibility to on some of these sites and getting these numbers actually materialize. Just I bring that up only because we're mid cycle of this eight year cycle that state law requires us to do this. So I'm curious what processes or just what what is gonna be done on the back end to make sure and I guess to make sure I know you can't control, right, what what people wanna build, but just how are we gonna get to to these numbers to actually be materialized? Yeah.

Do you want to take that?

That's sort of the goal of the rezone program. When we first adopted the current housing element, we saw that shortfall for our lower income RINA obligations, and through the rezone program, we were able to establish that significant buffer and reassess all of our current sites that needed some recalculation. So we are at a 20% buffer on all of our sites versus our arena baseline goals. And so that helps us with our requirements if anything were to be developed on those sites.

Yeah. And I just wanted to to further, state that the the programs that we were talking about tonight, program a one and a two, are a part of a suite of of programs that we are in the process of implementing in planning environmental review. So we are obligated to implement each one of those programs in the housing cycle. And like you stated, we are in mid cycle currently. And we've accomplished a number of them, including program A1 and A2.

And we'll continue to work through other processes too. And we'll be back in front of this commission actually before the end of the cycle with several different projects that we'll be implementing the housing element, which is the step one to getting more sites built with affordable housing. Todd, I think you can speak to this a little bit more. But there's other incentives that we've been working on as a county. And I think that there's definitely a priority for the county is housing and getting those things built. But as Riley indicated earlier, we don't build affordable housing at the county. We just try to incentivize it. So through all these programs, that is the goal.

Commissioner Samignano, if you wanted a little bit more detail, some of the things that are I was gonna talk about after after this item. We are bringing forward, and this is really for the benefit of all the commissioners, just a high level overview of what's coming in 2026 as it relates to zoning code amendments that are some of which are exactly what Joel mentioned, programs of the housing element that amend the zoning code to reduce regulatory barriers, to streamline certain types of housing development approvals. We are also actively engaged with all the special districts throughout the county. So think about water purveyors, the sewer district, recreation and park districts, for example, trying to figure out where the literal barriers are, the physical barriers are to further infill development so that we can further invest in some of the infill communities, the commercial corridors in the unincorporated county that have been really targeted for revitalization for many years in our general plan. So we're actively working through a number of those programs and we're hoping to make some headway with actual physical development.

Great. Thank you. And then I know it's in it's referenced a little bit in the report, but I think just for put just to bring it up here. Can you talk a little bit about the community input that went into developing the these sites, the Reno numbers?

Yes. That was done through the rezone program one, and there was a lot of community outreach in each of those target areas. Every community that had rezone sites, they were taken to those CPACs, and CPAC coordination was done then. Some CPACs were more accepting than others, but we had a later coordination in finding a way best way to have our RINA goals met while also being able to address community concerns and working with the community to help them understand that the rezone is also not developing sites right now. It is more rezoning.

Okay. Okay. So it was through it was through the CPEX Yeah. Only. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Well,

I think with that, I just wanna commend Riley and Joel and other county staff in preparing this monumental task of of updating our housing element or the within the housing cycle for our general plan update. I know trying to address our lower income deficit is is tough work, tough challenges, and glad to see the outreach of the public and and work with stakeholders and in this analysis. So I really, again, commend all the hard work that you've done. Is there a any other for further comments or a motion?

I just have one last thing, sir, and I'd appreciate it. You know, it's a lot of information. It's, like, 700 pages or so. And there's a lot of different bills that are kind of happening almost every legislative cycle. And there's a lot of arrows in the quivers of developers and or project opponents, so to speak.

Right? Transit oriented development comes into mind, for example, or just pushing infill development fees up to later when time of occupancy as opposed to time of submission. I don't know how your team are kind of on top of that, but as kind of moving forward understand in our if we were to approve this as written and the resolution allows for the staff to make minor adjustments administratively, but also update the website, Be great if we can have like a resource that if it's compiled. Again, don't wanna start a lot of headache for the staff, but overlaying like layers on some of these things, which I I believe you guys may already do kind of GIS wise. And then if so, if I'm a developer, but may or may not have the ability to hire other planners or architecture firm to do it for me, what might be the tools that I can find to say, does this meet SP so and so?

Is this a transfer oriented over so and so? Are there any credits above the ground, above the easement or anything like that? So something to that extent that we can kind of do it, think that'd be great. But otherwise, again, I echo the chair's thoughts. I think it's very commendable. It's a big lift and really looking for a certificate of compliance and or two thumbs up from ATD moving forward. And with that, sir, I'd be happy to make a motion to to move the staff recommendation.

Alright. We have a motion by the vice chair. I'll second it. And commissioner Virga seconds.

And with the members present, that vote does pass with everyone voting yes.

Alright. And then that brings us to our planning director's report.

Alright. Fairly brief tonight. Wanted to just, as I mentioned earlier, give you a heads up as to things that are coming your way in 2026. We've got a number of zoning code amendments that are teed up or will be teed up. The first of which is the crowing foul package coming February 9. We've done a lot a lot of additional outreach since the last time staff was here with a workshop. We've substantially revised the zoning code and made some edits to county code in response to all that feedback. So that'll be coming February 9. We do have a zoning code package that addresses all the recent legislation to date. That is coming tentatively March 9.

So two months in a row, we'll have some zoning code stuff. Actually, three months in a row. So in April, we've been working on what we've been calling the fix it package. We've basically gone through and every time staff notices some quirk, for lack of a better term, about the zoning code, people ask why that stuff is in there. So we've been going through and finding those things, keeping a list, checking it multiple times to figure out solutions.

Right? And and so we're modifying the zoning code, modernizing it in a way that recognize the intent of what was adopted but is more clarifying for implementation for not just us but any applicant or member of the public who wants to use it more effectively. So that package is coming in April as a workshop item and then it'll be back based on whatever feedback is received targeting the to come back for hearing in June. So that's the first six months of the year as it relates to the zoning code pieces. We've got a bigger list of things that we're doing in '26, most of which will come here, I'm not gonna divulge all of it at this time. Got a lot of work ahead of us in '26. So that's it for me tonight.

Alright. Wonderful. Clerk, any scheduling oh.

Related to the chicken ordinance, Is is there or are there time sensitivities around this ordinance, whether they be internal or otherwise?

Yes. So it it's been on our to do list for quite some time. What we're trying to do there, at least from an impetus perspective, is really have enforcement tools so that we can solve for some community nuisance issues. Hundreds and hundreds of roosters at properties that what we what we have seen and what our, both law enforcement and code enforcement officers have seen is really, unsuitable conditions and what appears to be, raising roosters for cockfighting. That was one of the original impetuses behind this.

Yeah. Okay. No. I certainly understand the need for clarity for enforcement purposes and the advantages that a a policy improvement could bring to that. I guess I'm kinda hoping that this body too is also gonna, like I just wanna pass.

I wanna get this one right. There's no need to, I think, punt this some kind of half baked idea down up up the food chain kind of, so to speak. And so unless there's, like, something I I'm hoping that, you know, that there's we can find a solution to this policy that, you know, has made all parties all parties can live with. Because I I did get some outreach to from from one group, and I think they did bring up some valid points related to, you know, their the hobbyists of raising, crying foul. I just don't wanna prefer to get the policy right so, you know, nobody cries foul.

Bad pun. Sorry. I had to.

So, yeah, I I agree. I I I know we've heard from, each of us have heard from stakeholders that, emphasizing their various, concerns and wanna make sure that we do it right. So, as long as there's no other clock that is ticking, clocking away. Alright. Clerk, any miscellaneous scheduling items? Nothing to me. Alright. Moving to public comments on any items not on the agenda.

No? And we have no additional public comments.

All right. Well then at 06:10, we adjourn.